<alanr> I'm on the line, but is no one else?

<ewallace> I'm getting there

<alanr> k

<ewallace> Hmm. will have to call again

<alanr> sidebar is updated

<ewallace> thanks

<ewallace> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Requirements_work_space

<alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Requirements_work_space

<alanr> discussion of how to organize requirements document

<ewallace> bijan: I think that we should be going from features to the requirements

<ewallace> bijan: its faster and more scoped

<ewallace> bijan: its also more modulor

<ewallace> agreed

<bijan> I don't think the requirements document *should* be for newbies to owl

<ewallace> which list?

<bijan> we have a primer

<bijan> I also suggest we leave this to the editors

<ewallace> alan: collect a list of features and other aspects of the design to drive writing

<ewallace> bijan: we should go do it

<ewallace> christine: I prefer features to requirements also

<ewallace> christine: I have some difficulty catch-up on OWL profiles

<ewallace> christine: list all features with examples and more description

<ewallace> ... make clear motivations

<ewallace> bijan: if we pile on the features at the start will make it hard to ever get done

<ewallace> vipul: I agree with Bijan

<ewallace> ... the scope is to limit to OWL2

<bijan> (But what he said he agreed with wasn't what I said :))

<bijan> The OWLED education task force is working on profile primers:

<bijan> http://wiki.webont.org/page/DL_Lite_Primer

<bijan> http://wiki.webont.org/page/EL%2B%2B_Primer

<michel> hi!

<ewallace> Alan: who is going to do writing on the Reqs doc

<ewallace> Evan, Vipul, Christine, Michel

<bijan> +1 to not another ref

<ewallace> alan: I am hearing a couple of things

<vipul> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/TraceabilityMatrix

<ewallace> ... Are you interested in providing a detailed outline?

<ewallace> vipul: I have a Framework rather than an outline

<ewallace> ACTION: vipul to start filling out matrix [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-owl-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-153 - Start filling out matrix [on Vipul Kashyap - due 2008-06-09].

<bijan> http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/overview.html

<ewallace> christine: have some button to show and hide domains

<michel> +1

<ewallace> bijan: I would like the requirements to be stated at a higher level

<ewallace> vipul: this is a generalization of Michel's table

<ewallace> vipul: biomedical users will get lost by the details of language feature

<ewallace> vipul: but expressed in his own domain he is more likely to understand

<bijan> re evan: I think the SHROIQ heading is sucky too; so I'm not for the exact categories, but some similarness

<ewallace> bijan: I think that incorporating lots and lots of details is probably too much

<ewallace> I agree that we don't want to have complete coverage across all domains

<bijan> The meta-requirements:

<bijan> Usage of OWL, particularly the OWL DL species of OWL, has identified several constructs that are of considerable utility and that fit well within the representation philosophy of OWL DL. Advances in the theory of Description Logics have provided a basis for reasoning with constructs that are not part of OWL, or not part of OWL DL.

<ewallace> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Requirements_work_space

<bijan> For both these reasons, it was decided at the first OWL: Experiences and Directions workshop to design an extension to the OWL DL species of OWL. The extension is designed to provide simple extensions to OWL DL that

<alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Requirements_work_space#Misc

<alanr> interoperability requirements?

<Zakim> alanr, you wanted to talk about not domain specific requirements (e.g. implementor)

<ewallace> alan: is there any input other than implementer and domain specific giving requirements

<ewallace> alan: such as general semantic web

<bijan> Feel free to add

<bijan> It hurts me!

<bijan> OW

<bijan> Plus, the link could be far fetched

<ewallace> alan: Over the week, think of other sources of design inputs

<ewallace> bijan: we should cast our net wider if we want to properly capture the other inputs

<alanr> ack

<vipul> Proposal: Could Christine and Michel help us step through the OWLED?

<ewallace> bijan: this seems like a really massive task to be complete about it

<michel> too much

<michel> no.

<vipul> +1 to incomplete but useful and true

<ewallace> alan: I think whatever we could pull up with a reasonable effort would be good

<alanr> jar was alan

<bijan> Uhm...So have I :)

<ewallace> thanks bijan

<michel> +q

<ewallace> michel: sort of generalized the modeling requirements, like an FAQ

<ewallace> michel: I don't think it's feasible to collect specific egs for every feature for every domain

<ewallace> michel: how does this relate to the Primer which also has examples

<ewallace> michel: perhaps we should do different views

<ewallace> ScribeNick: Evan_Wallace

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found ScribeNick: Evan_Wallace
WARNING: No scribe lines found matching ScribeNick pattern: <Evan_Wallace> ...
Inferring Scribes: Evan_Wallace

WARNING: 0 scribe lines found (out of 168 total lines.)
Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick?


WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Default Present: jar, Evan_Wallace, Vipul_Kashyap
Present: jar Evan_Wallace Vipul_Kashyap

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 02 Jun 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-owl-minutes.html
People with action items: vipul

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report